Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec 1;20(12):3058-3066.
doi: 10.11124/JBIES-21-00460.

Adverse drug events in cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions for diabetic conditions: a scoping review protocol

Affiliations

Adverse drug events in cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions for diabetic conditions: a scoping review protocol

Mari Pesonen et al. JBI Evid Synth. .

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this review is to provide an overview of adverse drug events in cost-effectiveness analyses related to the pharmacological treatments of diabetes and diabetes-related complications.

Introduction: The inclusion of adverse drug events in cost-effectiveness analyses is recognized in health technology assessments guidelines, but in practice, this is inconsistent. This inconsistency may affect the reliability of the evaluation and, therefore, indicate that the information provided for decision-making in health care is misleading. Reviewing if and how adverse drug events are incorporated in cost-effectiveness analyses is necessary to address this gap.

Inclusion criteria: Studies including participants who are receiving pharmacological interventions for diabetes, diabetic retinopathy, or diabetic macular edema will be considered for inclusion. We will include sources that focus on cost-effectiveness analyses using modeling framework, and are published in English between 2011 and the present. Other types of analyses and other types of conditions will be excluded.

Methods: The information sources to be searched include MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, the NHS Economic Evaluations Database, and the Health Technology Assessment Database. Studies in English will be considered for inclusion in the review. Potential sources will be assessed by 2 independent reviewers and imported into the JBI System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information. The results of the search and the study inclusion process will be reported in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. A specific data extraction form will be used to extract and analyze the data. Results will be presented in tabular and graphic formats with a narrative summary, and will be discussed in the context of current literature and guidelines.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005;21(2):240–245. - PubMed
    1. Briggs AH, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: OUP Oxford; 2006.
    1. European Network for Health Technology Assessment. Endpoints used for relative effectiveness assessment: health-related quality of life and utility measures. EUnetHTA; 2015. Report No. WP7.
    1. Council of Europe. Glossary of terms related to patient and medication safety. Committee of Experts on Management of Safety and Quality in Health Care (SP-SQS) Expert Group on Safe Medication Practices. World Health Organization; 2005.
    1. Skelly CL, Cassagnol M, Munakomi S. Adverse events. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2021. - PubMed

Publication types